Thorsten Pferdekämper wrote: > On Saturday 17 November 2007 10:11, Duncan Webb wrote: > >> Thorsten Pferdekämper wrote: >> >>> So I have installed usbmount, which also installed udev. After >>> that, /dev/nvram vanished. I could solve this by re-inserting nvram using >>> modconf. >>> Now, sometimes (not always...) after rebooting, the remote control did >>> not work any more. It uses /dev/input/eventX via lirc. I know about the >>> problem that lirc needs to know the correct event-number and I have >>> checked this. >>> >>> Only after removing usbmount, everything worked smoothly again. (Except >>> of automounting the usb devices...) >>> >>> Can someone give me a hint? >>> >> You should be able to use autofs for usb devices with the sync option >> set. This way the device can be unplugged safely. >> >> > > Thanks, Duncan. > I've just discovered that it was wrong to suspect usbmount. The problems with > the remote control just returned. I have now also deinstalled udev (which I > just needed for usbmount) and it seems to work now (as it did before...). > ...but I am still searching for the reason why the remote control sometimes > did not work. >
If i were you, i'd go for using udev. It's just a matter to be sure that the required modules are inserted properly. udev will create the appropriate devices. > I have also discovered that there are also sometimes problems with the sound > (oss on /dev/dsp). This is also only since I've experimented with the > udev/usb stuff. > Again .. i'd say that the required modules aren't being inserted properly. > About autofs: I thought that the problem with the unsafe unplug is because > the > vfat filesystem does not really implement sync'ed mounting. Does this make a > difference with autofs compared to usbmount? > > The problem is not with the mount, but rather with the umount.. and that is not a problem exclusive to vfat. What usbmount does is as simple a mounting usb volumes when they are inserted and (forcing) umount them when they are removed. This type of operation doesn't assure you any kind of filesystem safety since you might not get data synced before the device removal. Autofs, although not bullet proof, with the appropriate configuration will minimize this kind of problem since it will only mount the devices when the system tries to access them. They will also be mounted only for a short period of time after they are used. The data sync is handled by the mount/umount process, so if the device is not being actively accessed, you're home free. Currently i'm using a package that configures autofs in this kind of way. It's called mounttero and you can get it here http://myy.helia.fi/~karte/mounttero.html Regards, Hugo Monteiro. -- ci.fct.unl.pt:~# cat .signature Hugo Monteiro Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Telefone : +351 212948300 Ext.15307 Centro de Informática Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia da Universidade Nova de Lisboa Quinta da Torre 2829-516 Caparica Portugal Telefone: +351 212948596 Fax: +351 212948548 www.ci.fct.unl.pt [EMAIL PROTECTED] ci.fct.unl.pt:~# _ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Freevo-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freevo-users
